This invention relates to traffic enforcement devices for use in enforcing traffic ordinances. More specifically, this invention relates to remotely operated enforcement systems having velocity determining and recording means.
In the United States, the prevalent method of enforcing traffic laws is to utilize police officers who patrol the streets in police patrol cars in an effort to pursue, detain and ticket or warn those persons who they observe to have violated the traffic laws. Typically, an officer will monitor vehicle velocity by using a wide variety of alternative means to monitor such velocity, including the use of a radar gun (e.g., a Doppler radar), a laser beam, or sensing toils or pads placed on the roadway, as in U.S. Pat. No. 4,234,923. These alternative means require the involvement of at least one police officer, and a patrol vehicle including all equipment normally supplied a patrol vehicle. These resources are costly and are of limited supply. Further, the step of pursuing and detaining traffic ordinance violators can be dangerous to the police officer and the public at large. For example, an irate driver threatens the officer, the driver makes an effort to evade the officer, initiating a high speed chase, or the driver pulls over in an unsafe area on the highway, thus subjecting others to an unnecessary danger of collision.
Despite the dangers associated with the current methods of traffic ordinance enforcement, the benefits obtained outweigh the costs and dangers to the public. Proper enforcement results in the reduction in the number of traffic accidents and traffic fatalities, and a decrease in the costs to society of medical treatment and automotive and medical insurance. This was observed to have been the case when the national speed limit on interstate highways was reduced from 70 mph to 55 mph. In addition, the reduction of traffic accidents is highly correlated with a reduction in traffic congestion. When a patrol vehicle blocks even just one lane of a multi-lane highway, this may disproportionately decrease traffic through-flow, due to the need of accommodating merging traffic and due to a phenomenon commonly known as "rubber-necking" (the tendency of persons who notice an accident or accident scene to slow down in order to better observe the accident scene).
Traffic enforcement devices, which provide a means for enforcement of the traffic ordinances without the direct involvement of a police officer or a patrol vehicle, have been in use for some time in Europe and in other regions of the world. U.S. Pat. Nos. 4,866,438 and 5,066,950 describe remotely located devices which include a radar device and means of automatically triggering a high resolution photographic camera when a vehicle passes within its field of detection. These systems require matching of the license plate number read from a photograph taken by the camera with a number in a database of registered vehicles in the state, region or nation. Upon identification, a traffic citation is issued and mailed to the registered owner of the vehicle in a non-confrontational manner without utilizing a patrol vehicle or a police officer's time. Despite these advantages, because the location of the violation must be noted on the citation (if it is not readily apparent from the photograph taken by the device) and is almost always supplied to the driver, the public may soon become aware of the location of the devices. When this occurs, drivers will know that they must slow down at this location in order to avoid receiving a traffic citation. Although slowing traffic to safe limits is a purpose of these prior art devices, this purpose will only partly be accomplished (i.e., persons will obey the traffic ordinances within the field of detection of the device). An effective system of such devices, capable of enforcing the traffic ordinances within an entire urban area, will be prohibitively expensive, because the urban area which is to be monitored must have a sufficient number of these units to ensure that a majority of the streets in the area are, in fact, being monitored (i.e., in order to minimize or eliminate any streets on which drivers having knowledge of each enforcement unit location can violate the traffic ordinances with impunity). Using only conventional technology, this mandates that an effective system of enforcement be comprised of a large number of these units which essentially blanket the urban area. Because each unit consists of relatively expensive and technologically sophisticated components, a system which blankets all drivable streets and highways is prohibitively expensive.
Therefore, what is needed is a system which enables effective, low cost enforcement of traffic ordinances without requiring that a police officer and patrol vehicle pursue and detain suspected traffic ordinance violators. Further, what is needed is a system which cannot be defeated by radar jamming or by the driver merely slowing down within range of an enforcement unit.